LeighWhy is Kamala Harris disliked so much as VP?
specialdealershe’s a black woman? Seems like that’s enough for a lot of people.
Used to really like her as senator. She was a bulldog questioning people in front of committee, and going after other senators for nonsensical arguments. When she became candidate, she became completely stage-managed to the point that she seems so phoney. I'm not suggesting that most politicians are not phoney, but she just comes off fake and smug to me.
DrestaI'd guess it is the "isms"
DeceptichumACABism?
I can live with that ism.
BrikoXShe’s just incompetent. Look at some interviews with her, she can’t answer basic questions and has done absolutely nothing as a VP. It has nothing to do with her being a woman or black.
For me, it's strictly because of this. I'm not suggesting truancy isn't an issue worth combating, but going at it this way showed a shocking lack of sense - to the degree where I'm not sure I could trust any grown-ass adult who would go along with such an idea for more than 2 minutes.
BaconIsAVegWhat, specifically, are the issues you have with holding parents accountable for the actions of their children?
Nothing screams "my kid is going to turn away from truancy" like having a parent in prison.
When your cure only hastens and reinforces the bad behavior, your cure is bad and you should feel bad.
I would have no issue at all with child protective services being engaged, but sending an overworked single mother to jail isn't helping anything, it's just slaking bloodlust for punishment when people don't do as you'd wish.
If the goal is ensuring every child is equipped with an equal opportunity for education, then there are always better choices than hauling mom or dad off to jail. Can you seriously not see how patently absurd that is? It's a boneheaded move from top to bottom and she should feel shame for the rest of her life for putting her political muscle behind it. Educating every last child is important, but this proposed solution only makes things worse.
And that's what the issue is. It's not that there was intervention, it was this specific intervention is stunningly short sighted and entirely punitive.
If your child is missing 80 out of 180 days of school, you're doing a bang up job as a parent.
Sure, that parent is failing that child. I'm not disputing that. It doesn't matter whether the parent has an intent or capability to do right by their child, only whether they are. In the end, the child is being failed, and I don't think for a second that the right call is to sit back and do nothing.
But jailing the parent is simply not going to make it any fucking better. It's like trying to fight a house fire with a flamethrower.
It is simply and solely because of this incredibly poor lack of reasoning and judgement that I don't have a positive opinion of her. If I had to say anything nice, I would say "she was able to identify a problem", but her solution was so astoundingly and obviously counter-productive I'm not inclined to have even a neutral opinion of her, much less a positive one.
The fact that she attended to have the mom of a disabled girl arrested
New research also suggests that “truancy” is an arbitrary metric. The term refers to unexcused absences, but California gives individual schools substantial flexibility to determine what constitutes a valid excuse. (Certain reasons, like illnesses and religious observances, are always valid by law.)
And:
Shayla frequently missed school because she was in too much pain to leave the house or was hospitalized for long-term care. Her school was aware of these circumstances; it had records on file from the regional children’s hospital explaining that Shayla’s condition would necessitate unpredictable absences and special educational accommodations. Peoples and the school had worked together to set up some of those accommodations, which are required under federal disability law. At the time of her arrest, Peoples claims she was fighting with the school to get it to agree to additional accommodations under an Individualized Education Plan, which she said the school had rejected.
So basically, it's the school at fault here. Right?
She's a racist, classist noeliberal and a fucking cop (or close enough).
Her political career has been chock-full of attacking public institutions like schools, implementing policy against the poor, and protecting prison slavery. I'm not sure where exactly the confusion lies.
This is i,t shes a fucking cop. I dont trust cops.
This isn't Facebook grandpa, you need to show your work.
At some point you need to take a degree of personal responsibility and research things for yourself. This isn't a debate, you don't get the luxury of being spoon-fed everything.
yunggwailoAsking people to research things themselves is how you have genius' like op spreading fox news smears but from the left
But like this is all common knowledge if you want to have something of use to offer to this conversation. She was the California AG, literally the top policing position. Before that she was San Francisco's DA and ran on a platform of Tough On Crime. She's literally as cop and many would argue by extension, racist, as in systematic.
As for her neoliberal status, I don't think that needs to be explained.
Excuse me, but at some point someone will have to do research themselves, otherwise there won't be any knowledge.
Also, how do you know anything if you don't do any research yourself? Do you have someone else whisper in your ear to tell you things all the time?
I know things because people teach me. Just like other people know things because i teach them. I dont tell my math students to just read the damn book and figure it out themselves lol. Vast majority of people do not have the critical thinking or media literacy skills to properly research a topic let alone a plethora of them. If you dont wanna expend the energy to properly explain things thats fine, but telling people "just look it up yourself" helps no one
The guy who wrote the book is teaching you in written form. They teach critical thinking in English class, that's what it's for. I had to write my first lengthy research paper in 10th grade. It's not difficult.
yarrThis is so lazy. The burden of proof is upon the claimant. Feel free to toss out wild claims without providing anything to support what you are saying, but then don’t be surprised when no one believes you.
The Cons should love her, I don't get it.
Woman. Of color. Democrat.
That’s a large part of why no republican (or conservative) is going to give her any respect.
She’s a right wing authoritarian.
livusI'm not American but I get the impression the left hates her because she's a fairly right wing neoliberal?
When Biden was first elected, I saw one of those "what you order from Wish vs what you get" memes about this.
Had Bernie Sanders & AOC on the "expectation" side and Biden & Harris on the "reality" side.
It's crazy how the right screams that Biden is extremely left while he's center at BEST. Just shows how far they continue to shift right. I mean hell, some of them stopped watching Fox "news" because it became too "liberal" for their taste. That should tell you a whole lot.
cordlessmodemReal world center is American Red Party Communist because this country is so fucked
It's kind of funny, but also really fucking sad when these people scream about Biden being a far left communist who wants to destroy America with radical socialism or whatever.
I don't know how many actually believe it sincerely. Well, a lot do, but I think there's also an element of just shouting buzzwords without knowing what they mean. Parroting, really.
Like, dude... Please come to where I live and see that our centre-right party has identical policies to the Democrats. Overton Window is extremely fucked in America right now.
TinyPizzaWent to a new dentist, and the hygienist started out cleaning my teeth saying she doesn't talk about politics and likes to keep thing lite. 20 minutes later I was being told how socialism is the number one threat to America and how people need to wake up... Scary when people can be that worked up about something they clearly don't understand. More so when the person they are talking to has a mouth full of dental tools and hasn't said shit.
Yep, I'm in Canada. You should hear my soon to be late elderly neighbour go on about the ills of communism while the paramedics and Medigas trucks are at his house every other day.
As a centrist, both sides scream that the other is to the extreme.
Right: “We should exterminate all people not like us”
Left: “We should work together and build a better future“
Centre: “Why are you so similar‽”
m/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM
Literally proving my point. Nobody is saying to exterminate anyone except literal Nazis. I've had people claim that the left wants to be able to abort up til birth. You see how that is a gross mischarcterization of hundreds of millions of Americans? If you are claiming your side wants nothing but good and is perfect some the other is the literal devil there is something seriously wrong.
Oh fuck off mate.
We’ve all seen the end result go far-right governments when on power.
You might find this interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union
VoxAdActaWhich minority communities are the supporters and politicians of the Democrat party calling for the extermination of? I know Republicans and their surrogates have started talking about "hunting Democrats with dogs" and having gay people "line up against the wall", but I must have missed that rhetoric from the Democrats. Do you have a link or something I could check out?
It’s not crazy at all. They want the social expectation of what “far left” is to get established at Biden as a baseline. So they’re going to tie that label as much as they can so that when actual progressives put out a platform they’re seen as completely insane and non-viable despite the rest of the developed world doing it for decades.
I think this is the Overton Window changing.
I get the impression that someone like FD Roosevelt would not be possible in the US now.
spicy_biscuitsI'm sorry? Fox News is too 'liberal'?
You definitely are not American. AOC can't run for president until 28 due to her age.
Can-Utility
gzrrtOP meant 2028
Noted. Thanks for the clarification.
Wizard28 means “2028”
Wait what, is that why the US has so many elderly people as President?
I think the meme meant Vice President for her but if the VP gets to take over if the President dies I guess the rule applies anyway.
Doesn't help that she was a prosecutor in California during three strikes. She's basically a cop.
Ah, that's right. I had never heard of her until the US election and I remember looking her up and being a little dismayed.
6h0st_in_the_machin3I'm more on the opinion that any VP that bleeds will be hated.
Maybe not by the same people, though?
Where I live, we have had three female Prime Ministers - at one point both main political parties were led by women. I hated one of them because she cut welfare for single mothers, cut hospital funding, cut school funding, etc etc.
CylinsierThe single biggest problem standing between the left and sustained and meaningful control of the federal government is the complete lack of ability of voters to circle around a consensus candidate. There are several valid reasons to be critical of Harris just as there are pretty much every single Democratic Presidential decade basically of my lifetime. But Republicans vote consistently for candidates they dislike or even hate just to beat Democrats. Every single candidate for the Democratic nomination in 2016, 2020, and undoubtedly in 2028 will have some vocal subset of registered Democrat voters telling you exactly why they will never in a million years vote for them. I saw it constantly on Reddit and I don't see any reason why it won't continue.
Until somebody drops the magic "consensus candidate" name that somehow pleases everyone, Democratic voters are always going to be a major hurdle to their own success. And frankly I don't think that "consensus candidate" name exists. Such is the curse of being the big tent party opposite the GOP. Republicans know they can continue winning elections for at least a little longer thanks to Democratic infighting alone.
sustained and meaningful control of the federal government
You want a one party system? I'm not a big fan of the Republican party but there are some issues they are championing at the moment like free speech. Back in the day that was the Democrats, and I have no doubts it will flip flop again at some point but that just goes to show how we need at least two parties to act as a check on each other.
Silencing your ideological opponents is great and all until it's you being silenced.
CoderKatRepublicans are not championing free speech. Entirely the opposite with how they're treating LGBT folks currently.
And on that note, the Republicans are so beyond bad that yes, a one party state is actually better. To be clear, a one party state is utterly awful. That's how terrible the Republican party is. They cannot be even remotely viable when their entire platform is hating other people.
To be fair, dictatorships and communism is amazing if you have the right leader. It's just never happened before. It probably never will.
Yes I'm a Python developer.
Ah, if only all dictators would be benevolent dictators for life like Guido.
Dictatorships are (by definition) never amazing.
I’m not a big fan of the Republican party but there are some issues they are championing at the moment like free speech
Free speech like this?
-
Legislation in Tennessee could potentially criminalize speech that causes ‘emotional distress’ to or ‘frightens’ another person, which could be seen as a suppression of free speech (www.alternet.org/gop-revolts-against-free-speech-republicans-push-anti-protest-bills-across-the-country/).
-
In Washington state, Republican Senator Doug Ericksen introduced a bill that would allow state authorities to charge protesters with “economic terrorism” if they participated in illegal demonstrations or coerced private citizens into doing so (www.alternet.org/gop-revolts-against-free-speech-republicans-push-anti-protest-bills-across-the-country/).
-
In Kentucky, a bill was passed criminalizing the act of insulting a police officer (www.alternet.org/gop-revolts-against-free-speech-republicans-push-anti-protest-bills-across-the-country/).
EtherealDemocrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line.
It's reductive, but look at the Christian Right and Trump. Trump is nowhere close to the picture of a Christian. It's astounding he can safely cross the threshold of a church. But he promises to make sure abortion is illegal and men can't pretend to be women to steal kids, so they vote for him. Replace the abortion issue with guns and you get another set of voters who will vote Republican regardless of what they might personally feel.
Meanwhile and to your point on the left, each candidate's worst flaws are held as some kind of uncrossable line by people who are terminally online (which isn't helpful) and the Democratic Party does what they can to feed this and make sure they don't have to enact meaningful change. They just want to maintain the status quo but they get to do it with a pride flag waving behind them. If the Party establishment would just stop putting a thumb on the scale (not just against Bernie but ANYONE remotely progressive/left of the neoliberal center) and let the primary process shake out the most popular candidate, they might actually find themselves winning elections.